[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4615B043.8060001@yahoo.com.au>
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2007 12:28:19 +1000
From: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>
To: Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...hat.com>
CC: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-mm@...ck.org, Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>
Subject: Re: missing madvise functionality
Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> In case somebody wants to play around with Rik patch or another
> madvise-based patch, I have x86-64 glibc binaries which can use it:
>
> http://people.redhat.com/drepper/rpms
>
> These are based on the latest Fedora rawhide version. They should work
> on older systems, too, but you screw up your updates. Use them only if
> you know what you do.
>
> By default madvise(MADV_DONTNEED) is used. With the environment variable
Cool. According to my thinking, madvise(MADV_DONTNEED) even in today's
kernels using down_write(mmap_sem) for MADV_DONTNEED is better than
mmap/mprotect, which have more fundamental locking requirements, more
overhead and no benefits (except debugging, I suppose).
MADV_DONTNEED is twice as fast in single threaded performance, and an
order of magnitude faster for multiple threads, when MADV_DONTNEED only
takes mmap_sem for read.
Do you plan to include this change in general glibc releases? Maybe it
will make google malloc obsolete? ;) (I don't suppose you'd be able to
get any tests done, Andrew?)
--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists